portal. . WHAT THE HAPPENS WHEN... turret / tsta.. How I feel whenever I see something related to science hungry
x
Click to expand

Comments(112):

[ 112 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#48 - nucularwar (05/27/2013) [-]
How I feel whenever I see something related to science
#3 - anon (05/26/2013) [-]
A) it will accelarate up to a a point where the friction heat simply melts the rod
B) either break the rod since multiple atoms will collide and then A or simply A just way faster
C) rod is no longer infinite
#105 to #3 - anon (05/27/2013) [-]
>implying it can accelerate faster than terminal velocity.
Go back to school.
#81 to #3 - woojestonie (05/27/2013) [-]
"A" is incorrect. No acceleration will happen. It would stay still.
User avatar #5 to #3 - mouthwash (05/26/2013) [-]
A) is incorrect. Perhaps in a vacuum this would be possible, but Google terminal velocity. The pipe would reach a certain speed and not pass it.
User avatar #6 to #5 - Maroon ONLINE (05/26/2013) [-]
there is no friction in a vacuum
User avatar #8 to #6 - mouthwash (05/26/2013) [-]
That's my point. There's no air resistance and no friction in a free fall so it'd just keep going
User avatar #78 to #8 - wankershimm **User deleted account** (05/27/2013) [-]
but that would mean, that the rod wouldnt melt, as there is no friction the generate heat
User avatar #111 to #78 - mouthwash (05/27/2013) [-]
Again, that's exactly my point
+8
#39 - dixieman **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #79 to #39 - wankershimm **User deleted account** (05/27/2013) [-]
its science, it doesnt have to have a practical purpose, as long as we learn something from it.
#38 - wolfmac (05/27/2013) [-]
This is what ******* happens when you let physicists play video games and go on the internet.
User avatar #69 - akneegrow (05/27/2013) [-]
The other ones are cool to think about, but portals can not be placed on a moving surface. Once the surface moves, the portal disappears.
#67 - paradoxpoetic (05/27/2013) [-]
A) If they are vertically aligned as in the image, it would accelerate downwards. gravity is affecting it still.
B) You would be unable to move the orange portal's location, as you would essentially be trying to squeeze the rod together.
C) The rod has a finite length. Chances are, upon moving the portal it would either slice the rod off where the orange portal used to be, or seriously damage the solder and break the link.
User avatar #62 - fortunesnowman ONLINE (05/27/2013) [-]
Portals can't be moved while solid matter is going through them, and even then only if it's side to side, not forward and back.
User avatar #50 - forfucksakes (05/27/2013) [-]
C) If you are just moving the portal by sliding it over you would just bend or snap the rod.\
User avatar #35 - Mebeshe (05/27/2013) [-]
You'd open a hole in the universe and summon Cuthulu.
#26 - muckyducky (05/27/2013) [-]
Here's my take on how to mathematically make sense of this:

First case is rather simple: we model the situation by transforming the space locally around the portals into a curved manifold where the positions of the two portals is a single point. We can make the transformation so that any singularities created by the transformation is in the far field of the system and therefore any vector fields are fully analytic everywhere in the region of interest.

Now we have a loop of some sort in this manifold. And a quick calculation shows that the gravitational field should also be loopy (that or I got my numbers wrong). Given the way the loops are set out initially, the gravitational field is continuous through the portal point, and so should accelerate. It and even if the portals started in different orientation wrt the gravitation field (ie we get some a discontinuity), we can just do a Gaussian Integral around the point

The model becomes kinda strained in the second example. Our manifold now continuously deforms. But nothing in the local space continuously deforms except maybe the rod.

Now instead if we consider our original space as some sort of complex space that is everywhere zero except along the rod, with singularities at the portals, and do a contour integral of sorts around the rod acting as a branch cut connecting the two singularities. Then as long as the nature of the singularity of the portal does not change (as in our small loop integral around the portals yields the same result regardless of the position of the portals), we should find that the overall length of the rod decreases. This lets us ignore what actually happens at the portals. So since we have zero loss of actual material, the rod is compressed.

And as for the 3rd situation, I think I agree with most people that the rod is cut when the portal changes.
#27 to #26 - muckyducky (05/27/2013) [-]
Actually...ignore the complicated maths. I was using this as relativity revision. A friend looked over and gave a much better argument:

We instead consider the rod as a continuous set of rigidly linked points/lumps of matter (or disks if you prefer) initially at rest. I think everyone agrees that when we point a single lump object with mass in this portal configuration, it will accelerate continuously though the loop.

Now back our continuous line of lump/disk masses. We have every lump accelerating at the exact same rate (g) downwards. So they should not exert any extra force on teach other (given no other external forces) despite being rigidly linked. So we can consider each lump separately. The rod therefore accelerates down as a whole.

In the second case, we now have the same number of lumps moving a shorter span of space. Therefore the rod is compressed. How it is compressed depends on how fast the portals moved closer together.

3rd case. We just have to consider the situation immediately after the orange portal changes- just the rod at the same length above the blue portal. It's now been cut at where it enters the portals
#43 to #27 - savvasp (05/27/2013) [-]
I have absolutely 0 idea what you're saying, but you sound smart, so here's 5 internets
#74 - alchemicfreak (05/27/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #64 - dagramcraka (05/27/2013) [-]
portals disappear if the surface its placed on moves.
#68 to #64 - illogicalvulcan (05/27/2013) [-]
have you played portal 2?
User avatar #70 to #68 - namehasntbeentaken (05/27/2013) [-]
ok, portals disappear if the surface its placed on moves... unless its relative to the story
#63 - kaarle (05/27/2013) [-]
DJ 4DM1N, I'm scared...
#51 - rollontrolling (05/27/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#44 - fjyunofrontpage (05/27/2013) [-]
Wouldn't it be impossible for the two ends to meet since they're moving in the same direction at the same speed?
User avatar #45 to #44 - nucularwar (05/27/2013) [-]
maybe if you move the walls the portals are attached to?
#46 to #45 - fjyunofrontpage (05/27/2013) [-]
But wouldn't the pole stay still?
User avatar #47 to #46 - nucularwar (05/27/2013) [-]
if you move the walls closer together I think eventually...
i have no idea. I'd have to make a model.
#49 to #47 - fjyunofrontpage (05/27/2013) [-]
This is the most confusing ******* thing I have ever seen.
User avatar #60 to #44 - thehonorwolf (05/27/2013) [-]
I don't think they'd ever meet but you could always just grab it when the 2 ends are closest and weld sheet metal to both of them to attach them. Problem solved i think
User avatar #24 - Turmoil (05/27/2013) [-]
A and B, the prod would either crumple as the portals fell towards each other (which is the most likely scenario) or the portals would stay in place, I go with the crumple because basically you're putting a near infinite amount of force into the rod.

C) The closing of the original portal in order to open it on a different surface would sever the rod at the wall meaning you now have a single, rod with two ends.
User avatar #25 to #24 - Turmoil (05/27/2013) [-]
misspelled rod once, derp.
User avatar #7 - gilliam (05/26/2013) [-]
This is why
1) in portal you can't move portals, they dissapate when the surface is moved.

2) i personally think there'd be a gravity free tunnel inbetween two portalws, because else it would violate the laws of energy transformation and conservation.
The tunnel would also bend from on to another portal even if they're not directly above each other.
User avatar #9 to #7 - linklime (05/26/2013) [-]
You can move portals
Portal 2 you cut GLaDOS' neurotoxin tubing whatchamathings with a laser coming out of a moving surface with your portals
User avatar #10 to #9 - gilliam (05/26/2013) [-]
Yeah i know, i didn't like that, i've never seen valve break their own lore so hard.
User avatar #11 to #10 - linklime (05/26/2013) [-]
Maybe theres some rule about moving portals
User avatar #15 to #11 - codyxvasco ONLINE (05/26/2013) [-]
Maybe a portal in motion must stay at that motion and a portal at rest must stay at rest, break these rules and the portal dissapates.
#65 - bogsrin (05/27/2013) [-]
Ok, the only plausible one is A. B implies that is force involved between the two planes. C implies that their is an infinite amount of pipe. Their is no way to know the gravity acting on the piece of pipe being welded..... I think. Maybe.
#36 - anon (05/27/2013) [-]
If you moved the portal, it'll attempt to stretch the rod, which will immediately cause it to break.
It will become fixed in space, and gravity will no longer affect it because it is suspended by its own weight from the ceiling.
Basically, congrats, you just changed the position of the center point of your rod. It can't move without pushing against itself, though it's fused with the point of the collision.
You basically just soldered it to the ground and ceiling, and it will need force strong enough to crush it or stretch it in order to move the portal.
>Portals **** with physics and this is the most likely thing to happen. It's now balanced perfectly... on top of itself. troll physics much?
[ 112 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)